Planned Parenthood Labeled Family Research Council A Terrorist Group… (http://weaselzippers.us/2012/08/17/planned-parenthood-labeled-family-research-council-a-terrorist-group/)


Via LifeNews (http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/16/flashback-planned-parenthood-labeled-frc-a-terrorist-group/):

Now that the FBI has established a clear political motive in the shooting at the officers of the Family Research Council, more focus is being placed on how the pro-life group had been treated in the time leading up to the shooting.

Planned Parenthood is not responsible for the shooting and didn’t encourage it (though it appears to have not yet issued any condemnation of the shooting, with nothing appearing on the abortion business’ Twitter account). However, a listing of the Family Research Council as a “terrorist” group on its web site in 2006 is drawing renewed attention.

Keep reading…



how serendipitous ........

I *could* vaguely get the idea that the FRC could be regarded as a "hate" group. Religious groups that regard homosexuality as a sin don't exactly come across as compassionate to gays, even if they repeat the mantra, "hate the sin, love the sinner" (a phrase they use for other things besides homosexuality, such as alcoholism). So while I see it as a disagreement regarding religion, I can at least see it.

But *TERROR* shouldn't be overused for something you don't like. Terrorists use fear and the threat of violence - or actual violence - to compel people to acquiesce to their point of view. I'd be very hard pressed to find anything the FRC has ever done to appear to be that.

I don't want to see "terror" overused. Drug cartels are violent, but they are not terrorists.

well ya know ...,

.... since 'they' do not support that lifestyle, they want them drug behind 4 wheel drive trucks that have that confederate flag in the back window ......





:whistle:

well ya know ...,

.... since 'they' do not support that lifestyle, they want them drug behind 4 wheel drive trucks that have that confederate flag in the back window ......





:whistle:

Friend of mine on FB, one of his friends said that Paul Ryan wanted all gays shot and/or in camps. When asked about the source of that, he said PR was a well documented homophobe, no source needed, it was "all over the internet". When pushed more, he said PR had voted against a gay marriage bill. So, not agreeing with the gay rights agenda = wanting them all rounded up and shot.

And this is why people think that it's okay to do thins, because they are taught that disagreement = evil.

Paul Ryan: Poster Boy of Today's Extreme GOP (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/waymon-hudson/paul-ryan-poster-boy-of-t_b_1776647.html)



Yes, the Paul Ryan budget is extremely newsworthy for its uneven tax breaks for the richest Americans while gutting social safety nets like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, but Ryan's record on social issues and civil rights, specifically LGBT issues and women's rights, should not be glossed over by the media or by voters as November approaches. Despite the odd praise coming from conservative gay groups like Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud, Paul Ryan's record on LGBT rights is abysmal and far out of step with mainstream Americans.

Like most of the current Republicans in office, Ryan claims to want small federal government and strict constitutional reading... except when it doesn't fit their narrow social agenda. Paul Ryan has voted twice, both in 2004 and 2006, for an amendment to the federal constitution banning marriage between same-sex couples, a position presidential hopeful Mitt Romney also holds. In fact, Ryan bragged about his vote to amend the constitution in 2004 in a press release, saying, "I had hoped that this amendment wouldn't be necessary, but increasingly it appears that laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act will not be sufficient to protect marriage from certain courts that distort state and federal constitutional law."

Ryan's anti-equality crusade against recognition for LGBT couples hasn't been slowed down by the passing years and increased societal acceptance. In 2011 Ryan supported adding a constitutional amendment in Wisconsin's state constitution to ban marriage equality. And as recently as May of this year, Ryan voted for a bill that would prevent the Department of Justice from arguing against the constitutionality of the odious Defense of Marriage Act and has supported the move by House Republicans to spend millions of taxpayer dollars defending the bill against legal challenges.




so you do not support Ghey marriage, you are an extremist .....

Ryan's record on LGBT rights is abysmal and far out of step with mainstream Americans

But, if such a view is so far out from the mainstream, why does every state level vote go against it? Everybody wants it, except the majority of voters who must be out of touch with the mainstream, but who I always thought was the mainstream.

See what happens when you live in an insular fishbowl where everybody parrots the party line. You assume that the party line is some universal truth.

finally on the 3rd page of a Google Search;


Friend of mine on FB, one of his friends said that Paul Ryan wanted all gays shot and/or in camps.


I could find NOTHING about Paul Ryan, but this jackwagon turned up


Curtis Knapp, Kansas Pastor Who Said Government Should Kill Gays, Defends Statements (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/curtis-knapp-kansas-pastor-death-of-gays-defense-cnn_n_1559293.html)


The Kansas-based pastor who argued that the U.S. government should put gay people "to death" is now defending his statements in an exclusive CNN interview.

"We punish pedophilia," Pastor Curtis Knapp of the New Hope Baptist Church in Seneca, Kan. "We punish incest, we punish polygamy and various things. It's only homosexuality that is lifted out as an exemption."

As reported earlier this week by Good As You blogger Jeremy Hooper, Knapp appeared to call for the death of gays in a sermon. Hooper proclaimed: "Oh, so you're saying we should go out and start killing them? No, I'm saying the government should. They won't, but they should."



someone needs to tell this ass, he is NOT doing Christianity any favors ....

I *could* vaguely get the idea that the FRC could be regarded as a "hate" group. Religious groups that regard homosexuality as a sin don't exactly come across as compassionate to gays, even if they repeat the mantra, "hate the sin, love the sinner" (a phrase they use for other things besides homosexuality, such as alcoholism). So while I see it as a disagreement regarding religion, I can at least see it.

But *TERROR* shouldn't be overused for something you don't like. Terrorists use fear and the threat of violence - or actual violence - to compel people to acquiesce to their point of view. I'd be very hard pressed to find anything the FRC has ever done to appear to be that.

I don't want to see "terror" overused. Drug cartels are violent, but they are not terrorists.
Anti-terrorist is probably a better term, they don't want government policy changed because that would kill their profits.

finally on the 3rd page of a Google Search;





I could find NOTHING about Paul Ryan, but this jackwagon turned up


Curtis Knapp, Kansas Pastor Who Said Government Should Kill Gays, Defends Statements (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/curtis-knapp-kansas-pastor-death-of-gays-defense-cnn_n_1559293.html)


The Kansas-based pastor who argued that the U.S. government should put gay people "to death" is now defending his statements in an exclusive CNN interview.

"We punish pedophilia," Pastor Curtis Knapp of the New Hope Baptist Church in Seneca, Kan. "We punish incest, we punish polygamy and various things. It's only homosexuality that is lifted out as an exemption."

As reported earlier this week by Good As You blogger Jeremy Hooper, Knapp appeared to call for the death of gays in a sermon. Hooper proclaimed: "Oh, so you're saying we should go out and start killing them? No, I'm saying the government should. They won't, but they should."


someone needs to tell this ass, he is NOT doing Christianity any favors ....
I know this is getting off topic, but when was the last time anyone was prosecuted for incest? I don't think it is anymore.

I know this is getting off topic, but when was the last time anyone was prosecuted for incest? I don't think it is anymore.

If you're talking about an act between consenting adults, you're probably right. But it is still prosecuted in conjunction with other sex offenses. For example, if an 18 YO has sex with a 16 YO that is not a crime. But if they are too closely related then incest can be charged, which makes the offense into child sex abuse.

how serendipitous ........

Of course, Planned Parenthood has totally removed that page from their website.